UN panel adopts landmark climate report

COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) — The United Nations' expert panel on climate science on Saturday finished a report on global warming that the UN's environment agency said offers "conclusive evidence" that humans are altering the Earth's climate system.

The document, which combines the findings of three earlier reports, was adopted after all-night talks that went on until 5 a.m. Saturday by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The scientists and government representatives on the panel, who jointly approved the document line by line, then rested for a few hours before resuming the session in Copenhagen to finish the document. The report is scheduled to be released to the public on Sunday.

Replies to This Discussion

I enjoyed the comments much more than the article itself. Here's a few ;)

Not to worry folks, available for a limited time only, you can get your very own bottle of patented Jean-Pascal van Ypersele's Man Made Global Warming Elixir. Approved by 97% of scientists and guaranteed to stop floods, droughts, wildfires, storms, disease, melting glaciers, hurricanes, asthma, heat waves, and even mental anguish from that worrisome global warming. Containing the highest quality American tax dollars, a large number of American jobs, and specially imported horse manure our extra strength formula is guaranteed to give you a meaningless Joy Joy feeling not even another propaganda story from the IPCC can deliver. Blends perfectly with Kool Aid and is the official drink of the Global Warming Tax and Alarmist Society. Please drink irresponsibly and send your money quickly, supplies(jobs) are limited. U.S. residents please add a 97% pet project/debunked scientist severance sales tax to your order.

----------

The biggest flaw that everyone seems to be missing (some intentionally because they are part of the scam) in the 'global warming' 'issue' is that it will be (allegedly) solved by the politicians by legislating more taxes in the form of 'carbon credits':

Because if 'global warming' is indeed caused by man, then why are we NOT making the biggest demands to stop it on those causing the most pollution which is allegedly causing it, which in this case is clearly China (double of the U.S. according to a recently released 'pie chart') since their pollution level necessitated creating a new scale to measure it since the old one didn't go high enough?

So ANY 'solution' that is proposed WITHOUT China bearing the brunt of the 'cost' is going to fail, and fail badly.

So if China is not 'involved' then it's easy to see that the 'problem' and the progressive's 'solutions' are NOT about stopping 'global warming' or the pollution causing it, it's all about profiting from it.

All you have to do is follow the money, which is what this is all about.

To 'fix' this problem we are told that company's have to buy 'carbon credits' to allow them to continue this 'behavior'.

This isn't to STOP the behavior in any way shape of form, which is the first and biggest clue that this isn't about fixing the problem, it's about pulling money out of corporations that government would otherwise be unable to do.

Where does the money from the 'carbon credits' go? Why through the government of course, which will take it's cut (which as we all know is most of it), but that's where it gets murky, as the money goes to 'green energy' companies such as Solyndra, which is where the murkiness REALLY begins.

For example, during the Solyndra bankruptcy we see this statement:

"Solyndra's owners, Argonaut Ventures I LLC and Madrone Partners LP" will "realize the tax benefits of between $ 875 million and $ 975 million of net operating losses, while more senior creditors, including the Department of Energy, which provided a $ 535 million loan guarantee to Solyndra, will receive nearly nothing."

So SOMEONE got a bunch of money out of the deal while 'global warming' wasn't changed at all.

Oh, and the 'scientists' that all line up and sheepishly bleet 'global warming BAAAAADDDD'?

If scientists want funding for their study and research where do they get it? That's right, the vast majority comes from the government, so they make the deal that in order to get their funding they 'toe the line' because, their research projects are so vitally important and a few quasi-political speeches won't hurt anyone right?

And that's what this is all REALLY about, creating another way of taxing and spending while whatever is left over after the government is done with it will go to friends and political supporters who operate 'green energy' businesses which go bankrupt with the owners leaving with a bunch of money.

Also notice how interesting it is that there SO many stories that put forth the 'narrative' sometimes in great detail yet they never seem to even touch on solutions that match the (alleged) magnitude of the problem?

And I'm not talking about the usual 'we must do solar and wind blah blah' rhetoric, I'm talking about their REAL goal and solution.

Well, to be truthful some are talking about the real solution but are being quashed because their message is that ALL 'global warming activities' must cease and desist IMMEDIATELY.

So, cars - out, airplanes - out, any and all manufacturing - out, and pretty much every other activity that emit ANY type of 'greenhouse gas' WAY out.

So their plan is to stop life as we know it and go to an environmentally friendly way of life (think Amish on a global scale) that is virtually certain to eliminate a great portion of the human 'infestation' on the planet.

Sounds kinda extreme huh?

And THAT'S why you hear nothing about the proposed solution(s), because the 'global warming is bad' crowd KNOW that they cannot let that 'cat out of the bag' because they would quickly be labeled as the 'extremists' that they are and lose what tiny amount of credibility that they have.

--------

James Lovelock, the maverick scientist who became a guru to the environmental movement with his “Gaia” theory of the Earth as a single organism, has admitted to being “alarmist” about climate change and says other environmental commentators, such as Al Gore, were too.

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.

“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising -- carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added.

"It might have been statements like these that made people think he was a threat.
1.“I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective – the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now…"

"Good....enough of the profiting on dead babies. They should receive a decent BURIAL instead of being chopped up and used as "flavor enhancers" in human and dog food. PP is nothing but a huge industry catering to the soft drink…"